A symposium on Birchall's knee and its effect on first world economies.

[flinchfree]

US workers have **** all rights compared to us and are treated pretty s**t by a lot of employers

Its all about the money and everything else is lip service at best.

I hate how that is creeping in here, companies are pushing for us to become more like America because it benefits them.

Holding what American Organisations do up as the gold standard is a bad idea

Personally, I agree.
However the flip side of the 'US style deal' is that it is brokered by both parties...meaning that you can get treated s**t by your employer but usually because that's the deal you've negotiated. The opposite then also becomes true, and many people here in the USA get to fashion absolutely terrific work contracts that companies/employers are forced to offer/agree to to get the best candidates into their businesses.
It's also hand in hand with the whole 'freedom of movement' that so very many people/millennials seemingly love as part of their life work plan, and while companies are pretty free to fire and move on from you (ish, you'd be surprised at how much 'cause' and threat of suing through the courts keeps companies nervous about moving workers on without just reason) - so too do young and middle aged professionals bounce from job to job looking for huge whack pay rises and better job titles without having really done too much to earn them.

I'd say much of this is very clearly represented in our sporting teams and players, both in the US and Aus, and while we love at HFC to talk about loyalty and looking after our servants in a more loyal fashion than others, truth is we move on as a Club when it suits us - NOT the player.
There are a couple champions who recently moved on who will attest to this, and many other non-champions that more quietly find work elsewhere without much angst from the supporters because they have less glitz to their achievements.

I love old school myself, my mum started in the mail room at Telecom (Telstra) in the early 70's, as a woman with some potential and women's lib in full bloom, management there paid for her to go back to Uni and get her psych degree, and over the next 27 years she broke many glass ceilings to eventually become part of that senior executive group.
She retired at 52, got a pay out of 1 full years wages for every 5 she'd worked, and became a consultant at her leisure.
Thems were the days huh.

Don't think many companies or clubs are really looking for that kind of commitment anymore, but then again neither are the people or players.
Just watch what the players insist on at their next collective bargaining agreement, and then come back and talk to me about how our club should be looking after their players well beyond what they return in their play for the team, while they are with us.

 

[arupist]

US workers have **** all rights compared to us and are treated pretty s**t by a lot of employers

Its all about the money and everything else is lip service at best.

I hate how that is creeping in here, companies are pushing for us to become more like America because it benefits them.

Holding what American Organisations do up as the gold standard is a bad idea

Indeed.

There are only two things that make up the American Psyche:
1. Making money to kick ass
2. Kicking ass to make money

There is nothing there to suggest we should follow such a lead.
I would hope (and believe) there is a bit more to the Hawthorn Football Club than that.

 

[flinchfree]

Indeed.

There are only two things that make up the American Psyche:
1. Making money to kick ass
2. Kicking ass to make money

There is nothing there to suggest we should follow such a lead.
I would hope (and believe) there is a bit more to the Hawthorn Football Club than that.

Wow.
Guess I should kick my 14 and 16 year old kids out to save a little around the house, off the in-laws so I don't have to attend those pricey and time consuming Thanksgiving dinners or pesky hospice visits to faux raise my wife's dad's spirits.
Then I could simply bludgeon the local bank officer for a few extra benjamins to fund my local militia meetings and make sure I can lay out a good spread for them.
Screw evening meals with my kids and walking the dog or paying for that stupid tick spray.
* those dinners with friends and all that pseudo 'sharing' s**t we pretend to do.
And all those hours I give to my sporting teams and interest I show in the lives of it's players, money we send to a couple kids in South America coz they aint got s**t, the weekend we spend yearly in central Kansas building housing for those who can't afford it, the trips home to Oz I make every year because I miss my mates so dearly, the neighbour's driveway I shovel snow from because he's a nice old dude, and some other good s**t I'm sure I do that isn't getting me near my goals of more money and waging genocide, well all that crap's gotta stop.

Truth is, I'm 19 years here in the USA and lived in two different States - Illinois and Kansas, and traveled and spent time in 20 or so more with my dad living in NYC and my Aunt in LA.
The people here are the hardest working I've ever seen, and yes money is a major motivator - * College here is expensive!!! But so too is they simply have an incredible ethic for work and believe there is a morality and justness to it's application. They are also unbelievably generous to those they know and trust, or to Aussie travellers passing through. Just ask anyone who's visited the US about the treatment they get!
They're also tired as hell of being the world's policeman but their experience is that many countries simply want to commit genocide on their own people for no good reason and can't be reasoned with. Oh, and that too many bloody countries want bigger and more devastating weapons like the good old US of A keeps in it's pockets and do so because they know there's a threshold that makes it impossible to be dictated to over their actions.
See North Korea.
See Iran.
See the justification for Iraq, or the reasoning for entering the mess that is Syria.
America has lost hundreds of billions of dollars, perhaps in the trillion range, from waging these wars, NOT financially benefitted from them.
If only there was some amalgamation of the World's Countries that got together and actually exerted pressure on these morally deviant and evil regimes such that they didn't turn their people into cannon fodder....you know, we could call it the United Nations or something and they would represent EVERYONE of goodwill and MAKE SURE s**t like this cycle of inhuman violence and deprivation stopped.
That would be a good thing, maybe someone will get on it.....

I hate living here, but it's not because the people care only about money and violence. It's because I grew up in Aus with a completely different socio and economic model, that includes systems that are seen as socialist here in the States.
The political right here is also so damned far right, and makes up such a sizeable proportion of the country, that big ticket ideas like teaching evolution, protecting a woman's right to choose, paying your taxes because they provide services (NOT go disappearing into a politicians private pockets as is conspiracized), accepting religious diversity, accepting cultural diversity with graciousness and joy, accepting not all good ideas originate here and lessons can be learnt from other countries, well - those things are up for debate and something the conservative base see as their mission to change.
The polarization is unbelievable, with the left currently mouth agape and agog at the gap in popular thinking.
There is no unified 'United States', there is a motley and geographically bound series of states that all want to do their own thing and look suspicously at eachother at the end of gun sights.

It's scary, it's sad, it's disappointing, and it's why I can't wait till my kids are done and I can start my part time return to Oz.
I hope many things don't travel from the USA to Australia, but the way workplaces are set up or sporting clubs go about it are the least of anyone's problems. And money and waging war are not the problem, it's the battle for people's political souls and how they set up the world their kids will be raised in and thus espouse themselves that is the crisis

 

[toomanysquibs]

Personally, I agree.
However the flip side of the 'US style deal' is that it is brokered by both parties...meaning that you can get treated s**t by your employer but usually because that's the deal you've negotiated.

This is actually a bit of a myth. You can't negotiate a 'good deal' for yourself, in a marketplace where the employer has all the power, and you have no safety net to fall back on.

There' no centrelink in the US. There's no sentiment among all americans that everyone deserves a fair go. The notion of a fair go is non existent in many areas of society.

The wash-up from that is that there's no employer going to pay an unskilled worker much more than $10-14 an hour, and certainly no-one that is going to hire you on a bigger wage than that.

You can negotiate all you want. It's not going to work though.

It's understandable that people in Australia who think that the overall mood of society is the same in the US as it is at home.

But it's so different, a good portion of the population would be shocked at social norms, worldview, and attitudes to anything other than self interest.

Personally my experience in the US has been amazing. But for the average worker that I've met, they don't have a fraction of the good fortune that most people in Australia take for granted.

 

[Carl Spackler]

This is actually a bit of a myth. You can't negotiate a 'good deal' for yourself, in a marketplace where the employer has all the power, and you have no safety net to fall back on.

There' no centrelink in the US. There's no sentiment among all americans that everyone deserves a fair go. The notion of a fair go is non existent in many areas of society.

The wash-up from that is that there's no employer going to pay an unskilled worker much more than $10-14 an hour, and certainly no-one that is going to hire you on a bigger wage than that.

You can negotiate all you want. It's not going to work though.

It's understandable that people in Australia who think that the overall mood of society is the same in the US as it is at home.

But it's so different, a good portion of the population would be shocked at social norms, worldview, and attitudes to anything other than self interest.

Personally my experience in the US has been amazing. But for the average worker that I've met, they don't have a fraction of the good fortune that most people in Australia take for granted.

I’ve lived in both for many years and see little difference, despite the passions. The USA, Canada, New Zealand and Aus stand apart from the rest of the world in how similar they are to each other and so different to everyone else.

 

[flinchfree]

This is actually a bit of a myth. You can't negotiate a 'good deal' for yourself, in a marketplace where the employer has all the power, and you have no safety net to fall back on.

There' no centrelink in the US. There's no sentiment among all americans that everyone deserves a fair go. The notion of a fair go is non existent in many areas of society.

The wash-up from that is that there's no employer going to pay an unskilled worker much more than $10-14 an hour, and certainly no-one that is going to hire you on a bigger wage than that.

You can negotiate all you want. It's not going to work though.

It's understandable that people in Australia who think that the overall mood of society is the same in the US as it is at home.

But it's so different, a good portion of the population would be shocked at social norms, worldview, and attitudes to anything other than self interest.

Personally my experience in the US has been amazing. But for the average worker that I've met, they don't have a fraction of the good fortune that most people in Australia take for granted.

Not sure where you've been living or what jobs you've had here in the US.
Negotiations start at pay with any job here that's not minimum wage. Even minimum wage will be upped from it's pitiful levels if the employer thinks you bring added value and are not a short term flyer.
Secondly, benefits are almost all negotiated. As opposed to in OZ, things like health care, 401K (superannuation) contributions, life insurance, clothing allowances, travel allowances, expense accounts, etc are all variously offered or not offered as part of your negotiation for employment and play a huge part in taking or not taking a particular job.
While Starbucks is widely known to have outstanding benefits packages for as simple a position as a barrista, Walmart's pitiful offerings are also legendary and result in employees who can find almost no other options manning checkouts and stocking shelves under strobing flourescent lights.

As you move up into the professional world, the offerings vary substantively but almost ALWAYS can be negotiated further by a successful candidate. It is 1000 % the way things work, and if you are not aware then you are simply unaware.

Much of your later info I agree with, social support systems for the disadvantaged or those losing vocational opportunities because their jobs become redundant, outsourced, or the domain of ever more skilled and highly educated/potential job seekers is leaving an ever more dispirited underclass.
And many many people live in that space.

The USA is a horrible model, entrenched because the wealthy have convinced the working class they might one day buy a golden ticket to their own gated compounds of luxury lifestyle.
Good luck with that, but it's so ingrained that things will only continue to degrade and the gaps between economic classes will be canyons the stories of which you find in present day dystopic fantasy and sci fi movies.

 

[Brishawk]

Not sure where you've been living or what jobs you've had here in the US.
Negotiations start at pay with any job here that's not minimum wage. Even minimum wage will be upped from it's pitiful levels if the employer thinks you bring added value and are not a short term flyer.
Secondly, benefits are almost all negotiated. As opposed to in OZ, things like health care, 401K (superannuation) contributions, life insurance, clothing allowances, travel allowances, expense accounts, etc are all variously offered or not offered as part of your negotiation for employment and play a huge part in taking or not taking a particular job.
While Starbucks is widely known to have outstanding benefits packages for as simple a position as a barrista, Walmart's pitiful offerings are also legendary and result in employees who can find almost no other options manning checkouts and stocking shelves under strobing flourescent lights.

As you move up into the professional world, the offerings vary substantively but almost ALWAYS can be negotiated further by a successful candidate. It is 1000 % the way things work, and if you are not aware then you are simply unaware.

Much of your later info I agree with, social support systems for the disadvantaged or those losing vocational opportunities because their jobs become redundant, outsourced, or the domain of ever more skilled and highly educated/potential job seekers is leaving an ever more dispirited underclass.
And many many people live in that space.

The USA is a horrible model, entrenched because the wealthy have convinced the working class they might one day buy a golden ticket to their own gated compounds of luxury lifestyle.
Good luck with that, but it's so ingrained that things will only continue to degrade and the gaps between economic classes will be canyons the stories of which you find in present day dystopic fantasy and sci fi movies.

It’s not the system that was disputed it was the reality it provides the majority of people.


P = person
C = company

Low means attempt to negotiate for low wages and benefits.

High means attempt to negotiate for high wages.

In the first instance we assume the company chooses low then the the person faces a wage of 1 or unemployment (-10). No brainer, the person would choose low given the company bids low. Notice the company is no worse off as they just hire someone else.

If the company chooses high then the person would choose high. However this is the worst result for the company.

So for the company their best result is choosing low regardless of what the person does and that is why Walmart can pay next to nothing and still have employees.

The only way this changes is if there is a penalty for the company failing to hire the person. So high value individuals are fine to negotiate but the majority of society faces a very difficult task to negotiate as they have no leverage as they are easily replaced.

When half your country pays no income tax, you know the race to the bottom has been won.

 

[flinchfree]

It’s not the system that was disputed it was the reality it provides the majority of people.

Ok, that's not how I read it, but ok if that was the gist.

If the company chooses high then the person would choose high. However this is the worst result for the company.

No, only the worst result if costs of employment are biggest factor in profit margin to the company.
People shop at Walmart because they can buy cheap cheap shitey made goods and couldn't care less about service.
People buy cel phones from Sprint because their workforce does a better job selling the product and service than it's competitors, thus the need to hire better quality staff to outperform it's rivals.
So you offer better wages, better benefits, etc to get the best staff, because you generate far more profit through greater sales than you lose in the higher incomes you're paying out to your employees.
My wife works in the insurance game on the benefits side, working to broker coverage for large and medium multinationals. I know quite a bit about HR and how it works here, and unquestionably work contracts are more prevalent in the US and part of the system. Anyone reasonably well qualified looks to engage in discussion when they are interviewing or being offered employment.

So for the company their best result is choosing low regardless of what the person does and that is why Walmart can pay next to nothing and still have employees.

No, read above.

The only way this changes is if there is a penalty for the company failing to hire the person. So high value individuals are fine to negotiate but the majority of society faces a very difficult task to negotiate as they have no leverage as they are easily replaced.

Yes, and though majority description is true - because of the size of the workplace you're still only a portion of the system as described and aspirationally - and this is ultimate important because it's what's sold to the American from the cradle - the dream is that you will have upward mobility. You know, bootstraps and all that.
And people believe it, regardless of institutionalized poverty, because on some levels it actually works.
People DO re-invent themselves here in the US, they DO go back to school to get higher ed, they DO work night shifts if it gets them in the door to some other opportunity, etc.

And millions upon millions end up living a pretty good life, especially outside the overpriced markets of NYC, Boston and LA where cost of living is outlandish.
We bought our 325sq m home in a lovely neighbourhood backing on to a golf course for 400K.
We own a Beemer and a Merc, both new, and have a nice lifestyle because our wages are high after 20 yrs of work and upward mobility and costs are low.
We had nothing but 25K in debt when we got married at 32 and 35 years of age respectively.

It DOES happen, and for many many people.
But agree that for an incredibly high proportion of US citizenry it's more pipedream than reality.

When half your country pays no income tax, you know the race to the bottom has been won.[/QUOTE]

Yup, race to the top and race to the bottom.
Reminds me, I need to buy me a lotto ticket tonight.....over 400 mill in the Powerball is up for grabs.

 

[toomanysquibs]

I’ve lived in both for many years and see little difference, despite the passions. The USA, Canada, New Zealand and Aus stand apart from the rest of the world in how similar they are to each other and so different to everyone else.

It depends who you were mixing with, and in what states I'm pretty sure. I know plenty of people who do well in the US in LA, NY and San Francisco. But if you hang for any length of time with people from unskilled working backgrounds in the Carolinas, or Ohio, or Kentucky, Florida or Michigan you'll suddenly see a picture so far removed from Australia that you can't believe you're living in the same world.

I've never experience the kind of culture shock I have in the US, even when I lived and worked in Asia.

There's just no comparison to how good we've got it at home, versus the US - particularly if you're from a poor background, or suffering from ill health.

 

[Brishawk]

It’s not the system that was disputed it was the reality it provides the majority of people.

Ok, that's not how I read it, but ok if that was the gist.

If the company chooses high then the person would choose high. However this is the worst result for the company.

No, only the worst result if costs of employment are biggest factor in profit margin to the company.
People shop at Walmart because they can buy cheap cheap shitey made goods and couldn't care less about service.
People buy cel phones from Sprint because their workforce does a better job selling the product and service than it's competitors, thus the need to hire better quality staff to outperform it's rivals.
So you offer better wages, better benefits, etc to get the best staff, because you generate far more profit through greater sales than you lose in the higher incomes you're paying out to your employees.
My wife works in the insurance game on the benefits side, working to broker coverage for large and medium multinationals. I know quite a bit about HR and how it works here, and unquestionably work contracts are more prevalent in the US and part of the system. Anyone reasonably well qualified looks to engage in discussion when they are interviewing or being offered employment.

So for the company their best result is choosing low regardless of what the person does and that is why Walmart can pay next to nothing and still have employees.

No, read above.

The only way this changes is if there is a penalty for the company failing to hire the person. So high value individuals are fine to negotiate but the majority of society faces a very difficult task to negotiate as they have no leverage as they are easily replaced.

Yes, and though majority description is true - because of the size of the workplace you're still only a portion of the system as described and aspirationally - and this is ultimate important because it's what's sold to the American from the cradle - the dream is that you will have upward mobility. You know, bootstraps and all that.
And people believe it, regardless of institutionalized poverty, because on some levels it actually works.
People DO re-invent themselves here in the US, they DO go back to school to get higher ed, they DO work night shifts if it gets them in the door to some other opportunity, etc.

And millions upon millions end up living a pretty good life, especially outside the overpriced markets of NYC, Boston and LA where cost of living is outlandish.
We bought our 325sq m home in a lovely neighbourhood backing on to a golf course for 400K.
We own a Beemer and a Merc, both new, and have a nice lifestyle because our wages are high after 20 yrs of work and upward mobility and costs are low.
We had nothing but 25K in debt when we got married at 32 and 35 years of age respectively.

It DOES happen, and for many many people.
But agree that for an incredibly high proportion of US citizenry it's more pipedream than reality.

When half your country pays no income tax, you know the race to the bottom has been won.

Yup, race to the top and race to the bottom.
Reminds me, I need to buy me a lotto ticket tonight.....over 400 mill in the Powerball is up for grabs.[/QUOTE]
The majority of the workforce in the USA has no bargaining power. That was my point. Because large sections of the economy value workers as a commodity. Don’t get me wrong, they aren’t all bastards but the outcome for large sections of that economy are a long way beneath the average.

You characterisation of the myth of upward mobility is accurate. The barriers to education and training, along with barriers to access health are two big problems the American system carries. It actually encourages a larger gap between rich and poor (which in and of itself is an inhibitor of upward mobility) by restricting access to the primary means by which a person can propel themselves up the economic ladder. Price certainty in the form of meaningful minimum wages and conditions also provides a level of certainty than empowers workers to seek alternative employment knowing they are not at the mercy of their negotiating skills or the mood of the moment etc.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Yup, race to the top and race to the bottom.
Reminds me, I need to buy me a lotto ticket tonight.....over 400 mill in the Powerball is up for grabs.

The majority of the workforce in the USA has no bargaining power. That was my point. Because large sections of the economy value workers as a commodity. Don’t get me wrong, they aren’t all bastards but the outcome for large sections of that economy are a long way beneath the average.

You characterisation of the myth of upward mobility is accurate. The barriers to education and training, along with barriers to access health are two big problems the American system carries. It actually encourages a larger gap between rich and poor (which in and of itself is an inhibitor of upward mobility) by restricting access to the primary means by which a person can propel themselves up the economic ladder. Price certainty in the form of meaningful minimum wages and conditions also provides a level of certainty than empowers workers to seek alternative employment knowing they are not at the mercy of their negotiating skills or the mood of the moment etc.[/QUOTE]

It looks like America is infected with optimism. Nasty thing, optimism, as it inspires people to do better and try more.

And the part of the country most likely to achieve upward mobility is the place labeled earlier in this thread as full of hopeless, desperate people.

As I said earlier, despite the passions Australia and the USA have far more in common than not. It’s also possible that America does some (very few, most certainly) things better than Aus. Inquisitive minds may want to search that out.

 

[Brishawk]

The majority of the workforce in the USA has no bargaining power. That was my point. Because large sections of the economy value workers as a commodity. Don’t get me wrong, they aren’t all bastards but the outcome for large sections of that economy are a long way beneath the average.

You characterisation of the myth of upward mobility is accurate. The barriers to education and training, along with barriers to access health are two big problems the American system carries. It actually encourages a larger gap between rich and poor (which in and of itself is an inhibitor of upward mobility) by restricting access to the primary means by which a person can propel themselves up the economic ladder. Price certainty in the form of meaningful minimum wages and conditions also provides a level of certainty than empowers workers to seek alternative employment knowing they are not at the mercy of their negotiating skills or the mood of the moment etc.

It looks like America is infected with optimism. Nasty thing, optimism, as it inspires people to do better and try more.

And the part of the country most likely to achieve upward mobility is the place labeled earlier in this thread as full of hopeless, desperate people.

As I said earlier, despite the passions Australia and the USA have far more in common than not. It’s also possible that America does some (very few, most certainly) things better than Aus. Inquisitive minds may want to search that out.[/QUOTE]
Very interesting. Looks like population density negatively correlated with upward mobility (some obvious exceptions aside).

I find that interesting because cities typically have lower unemployment than less populated regions. You also find a larger diversity of businesses in cities. These would seem to suggest cities provide more economic opportunity but that map almost says the opposite.

 

[Carl Spackler]

Very interesting. Looks like population density negatively correlated with upward mobility (some obvious exceptions aside).

I find that interesting because cities typically have lower unemployment than less populated regions. You also find a larger diversity of businesses in cities. These would seem to suggest cities provide more economic opportunity but that map almost says the opposite.

Yes, perhaps counter intuitive, but where you live seems much less linked to upwards mobility than how you live.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/04/...ward-mobility-shows-paths-out-of-poverty.html

“The data shows we can do something about upward mobility,” said Mr. Chetty, a Harvard professor, who conducted the main study along with Nathaniel Hendren, also a Harvard economist. “Every extra year of childhood spent in a better neighborhood seems to matter.”

The places where poor children face the worst odds include some — but not all — of the nation’s largest urban areas, like Atlanta; Chicago; Los Angeles; Milwaukee; Orlando, West Palm Beach and Tampa in Florida; Austin, Tex.; the Bronx; and the parts of Manhattan with low-income neighborhoods.

All else equal, low-income boys who grow up in such areas earn about 35 percent less on average than otherwise similar low-income children who grow up in the best areas for mobility. For girls, the gap is closer to 25 percent.

[Good upward mobility] places tend to share several traits, Mr. Hendren said. They have elementary schools with higher test scores, a higher share of two-parent families, greater levels of involvement in civic and religious groups and more residential integration of affluent, middle-class and poor families.

 

[eldorado]

>>>

 

[PT Bar None]

>>>

+1 for thread title